Tech companies challenge China's censorship

In a test case for U.S. tech companies eager to present a united front against censorship, a computer industry lobbying group is calling on the Obama administration to intervene in China's move to force PC makers to pre-install censoring software on all new computers.

China's new regulation underscores the difficulties U.S. tech companies face in overseas markets from governments that sometimes see technology as threats to their rule.

Disclosed this week, the new regulation has roiled the global tech industry and triggered protests by human rights activists and Chinese citizens. The measure requires computer manufacturers to include the filtering software on all new machines by July 1.

A team of researchers at the University of Michigan said tests of the software — dubbed Green Dam-Youth Escort — found that it blocked not only pornography but also some political content and contained programming errors that allow malicious Web sites to steal private data, send spam or turn the computer into a host to launch other attacks.

"It could be everything from a crappy piece of software to a deeply nefarious thing," said Colin Maclay, managing director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, which closely monitors the Web. The program's filters can easily be expanded through updates, he added.

Advertisement

"I would not be surprised to learn that the (Chinese) security folks had a hand in this and see it as an additional tool for censorship and information gathering," said Kenneth Lieberthal, the National Security Council's senior director for Asia during the last 2﻿1/2 years of the Clinton administration.

On the Chinese blogosphere, some writers claim the software has more to do with government corruption than cyberspying, charging bureaucrats with getting kickbacks by making the flawed software mandatory on every new PC. Meanwhile, The Associated Press reported Friday that Santa Barbara-based Solid Oak Software claims the filtering software contains code stolen from its software.

Hewlett-Packard, the leading U.S.-based PC vendor in China, had little to say publicly about the controversy. In a statement, the company said it is working "to seek additional information, clarify open questions and monitor developments on this matter."

The controversy is the latest example of how Silicon Valley companies can face public relations disasters when their technology is used by governments to stifle civil liberties. "Just as General Motors was criticized for providing trucks for the South African apartheid police, so will high-tech companies be criticized for the use of their equipment for repressive actions," said Kirk Hanson, executive director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.

Valley companies such as Google, Yahoo and Cisco Systems have been pressured by Congress to do more to protect user privacy and fight censorship overseas. In 2007, Yahoo settled a lawsuit with two pro-democracy Chinese journalists, Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning, who were sent to jail after Chinese authorities demanded and received information about their online activities from the Sunnyvale Internet giant.

Last year, Cisco came under fire after it was disclosed that one of its employees in China used a slide in a company presentation that human rights advocates say showed how the company cooperated in setting up a network system that aided in the persecution of religious groups. The San Jose networking company, though, vigorously denied the charge and said it sells only "generic" Internet routing and switching equipment.

The Global Network Initiative, a group that includes Yahoo, Google, Microsoft and academic and human rights organizations, endorsed a code of ethics last year that commits companies to "respect, protect and advance user rights to freedom of expression and privacy" in the face of government pressure for censorship and to disclose users' personal information.

"They've learned the hard way" about the importance of including such principles in corporate missions, said Harvard's Maclay, who worked on the initiative.

In the China software case, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a lobbying group that represents tech companies such as Google, Yahoo and Oracle, is asking the Obama administration to pressure Beijing to abandon the requirement.

"Handing any government further tools to easily block information should be a concern for countries throughout the world," the organization said in a statement.

Lieberthal, though, said it's unlikely China's government will be swayed by anything the United States says if it deems this issue to be about domestic security.

One industry executive, who did not want to be identified, agreed. "They are not people who brook opposition," he said. "These are not nice folks. This is just the latest in a series of ham-handed moves by them. If you want to make headway in the West and convince people you are OK, you have to learn to have less of a tin ear."

But the global outcry, including lawsuits filed by Chinese, and apparent buggy nature of Green Dam, could cause the government to back down, observers say.

"It wasn't just that it would hurt competition in the marketplace or human rights, it hits every place," Maclay said. "If you are using (Microsoft) Word and you type some words that are on the (banned) keywords list, it will shut the whole system down. It makes the computer less valuable. It's a disaster."